U.S. wants to share border stations with Homeland Security running the show.

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,389
11,448
113
Low Earth Orbit
American reaction wasn't favourable when the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) said in August that it was going to close down operations next spring at three land-border crossings with the U. S, including two south of Montreal.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security didn't like the prospect of one-way border crossings, where people can get into the U.S., but not into Canada.

Complicating the issue was the fact that at two of the three border stations, including one of the two south of Montreal, the corresponding American stations had been undergoing expensive modernization.
Ever since the CBSA announcement, those upgrades have been put on hold and the U.S. has asked Canada to consider sharing the two U.S. facilities being upgraded.

That request, though, has sparked a more wide-ranging discussion between the two countries about the future of separate border stations at small crossings in general.

In August, the CBSA said it wants to close down its Franklin Centre and Jamieson's Line border stations south of Montreal, as well as a third station on the Saskatchewan-Montana border.
On the American side of the Franklin Centre crossing, in Churbubusco, N.Y., U.S. Customs and Border Protection is in the midst of a $6.7-million upgrade of its own border station. The agency doesn't want to see that money go to waste as a result of the Canadian closing of the Franklin Centre station.

There is no modernization work being done on the American side of the other border crossing south of Montreal affected by CBSA's August announcement -that crossing might end up closing completely.
This crossing, which the CBSA calls the Jamieson's Line crossing, links the Quebec hamlet of Powerscourt with the New York town of North Burke.

Although the practice of Canadian and American border officers working out of the same building -as opposed to separate buildings 100 or 200 metres away -is rare, there are, in fact, precedents for it. And the practice seems to work with no problems.
Canada and the U.S. currently share six border stations at relatively low-traffic crossings. All of these crossings are in Western Canada except for one -the Noyon/ Alburg, Vt. crossing south of Montreal.

While visiting Montana in August, U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano said it might be possible to persuade Canada to work out of the U.S. facility being modernized at the small Montana-Saskatchewan crossing targeted by CBSA's August closure announcement.

Last month, Raphael Lemaitre, an official with the Department of Homeland Security, told The Gazette the U.S. wanted "to explore alternatives with CBSA to enable the continued facilitation of two-way traffic."
Those exploratory talks have now begun, said Sabrina Mehes, a CBSA official. In fact, she said, the future of "all smaller crossings" between the two countries are up for talks.

In addition to the three border stations slated by the CBSA for closure next April, four other small stations, including three in Quebec, are to see their operating hours reduced by CBSA next spring.
Those three are the Glen Sutton and East Pinnacle stations in the Eastern Townships, and Morses Line station near the huge Phillipsburg/ Highgate Springs, Vt. crossing.


Read more: U.S. wants to share border stations
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Apparently they're gonna have Walmart employees equipped with sniper rifles.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
I find this US paranoia to be extremely annoying. Whatever happened to the unguarded border Canada and the US used to share? It is interesting to note that Europe's open borders do not seem to have made it any more open to attack than the US. All this cross-border security achieves is the stifling of commerce and the inconveniencing of travelers. Not only that, but If a terrorist really wanted to get into the US from Canada all of the security measures currently in place would be utterly useless. The US can't keep Mexicans or Mexican drugs out of the US along the 3000 km US-Mexico border. Try doing that with a border more than twice as long.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,389
11,448
113
Low Earth Orbit
I'd rather not have to ask an American for permission to enter my own country. Nobody else sees a fault with this? It's not about 3 crossings anymore. That is a little out dated. It is the whole shebang that they are currently discussing.

First pasports then NEXUS now what?
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,389
11,448
113
Low Earth Orbit
"My own country" Which we are obliged to make mortage payments to a private bank for the privilage of living in.
Check your ID. Do you have any that says you are bonafide Canadian or is it only Provincial. Passport only says you reside here but isn't proof you are a Canadian.
 

Mic

New Member
Nov 27, 2010
16
0
1
Vancouver
i personally hate those crossings! the lines are huge, the personnel is rude.
and having friends in the states for me its a nightmare every time i want to drive across the border!!
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Sharing a border station would make sense as it would save money. The idea that it should be run by one country or the other is offenive though. If it's going to be run by one agency, it ought to be an egency both countries share in common, and not one controlled by one country exclusively.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,389
11,448
113
Low Earth Orbit
Sharing a border station would make sense as it would save money. The idea that it should be run by one country or the other is offenive though. If it's going to be run by one agency, it ought to be an egency both countries share in common, and not one controlled by one country exclusively.
Ever heard of sovereignty?

Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a geographic area, such as a territory.[1][2] It can be found in a power to rule and make law that rests on a political fact for which no purely legal explanation can be provided. The concept has been discussed, debated and questioned throughout history, from the time of the Romans through to the present day, although it has changed in its definition, concept, and application throughout, especially during the Age of Enlightenment. The current notion of state sovereignty is often traced back to the Treaty of Westphalia (1648), which, in relation to states, codified the basic principles of territorial integrity, border inviolability, and supremacy of the state (rather than the Church). A sovereign is the supreme lawmaking authority within its jurisdiction.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Ever heard of sovereignty?

Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a geographic area, such as a territory.[1][2] It can be found in a power to rule and make law that rests on a political fact for which no purely legal explanation can be provided. The concept has been discussed, debated and questioned throughout history, from the time of the Romans through to the present day, although it has changed in its definition, concept, and application throughout, especially during the Age of Enlightenment. The current notion of state sovereignty is often traced back to the Treaty of Westphalia (1648), which, in relation to states, codified the basic principles of territorial integrity, border inviolability, and supremacy of the state (rather than the Church). A sovereign is the supreme lawmaking authority within its jurisdiction.

Then keep them separate. The idea that one country's border agency would be run by another foreign country is simply unacceptable.

As for the question of sovereignty though, it cannot be interpreted in such absolutes, otherwise we'd have to conclude that Ontario should become a sovereign province, or Ottawa a city state. Before you know it, there would be no country left.

In the world of today, it could make sense to share resources as long as both countries are on an equal footing, and not one kowtowing to the other.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,389
11,448
113
Low Earth Orbit
Provinces are sovereign to the point they each make their own laws, taxes, tarrifs, school ciriculums, etc. The Federal Govt was never supposed to have the power it does.

If you want to save a nickel or two there are far better ways than letting an agency that isn't liable to anyone in US or Canada run our ports of entry.